Author: Eternity Lab

Mamun_Sheikh/Shutterstock

We may receive a commission on purchases made from links.

One of the cornerstones to Amazon’s commanding presence in the tech sector is its Alexa smart assistant, allowing you to network smart tech devices in your home into a seamless setup. Naturally, you need Alexa-compatible devices to use the assistant, and while there are plenty of cool third-party devices that are compatible, the simplest approach would be to use Amazon’s own Alexa-ready devices. While some Alexa devices can be a bit expensive, you can find gadgets like smart plugs, streaming sticks, and smart speakers on Amazon for more reasonable prices if you know where to look.

Many Alexa-ready devices sold by Amazon can be on the pricey side, with the major standbys like smart displays and smart speakers easily exceeding $100 if you go for the latest and greatest models. If you don’t mind downgrading a little bit, though, you can find a variety of first-party Alexa devices worth buying that don’t cross the $100 threshold in just about every smart device category, all without sacrificing overall quality or usability.

Amazon Smart Plug

Setting up any kind of smart, Alexa-powered tech in your home naturally requires Alexa-compatible devices, and not everything you own is going to be. Luckily, one of the cheapest Alexa devices you can get at $24.99 is also one of the most generally useful: the Amazon Smart Plug.

The Amazon Smart Plug can be plugged into any regular outlet in your home, then have any other device or small appliance plugged into it. When the plug is plugged in, it can be detected by your Amazon Alexa app, allowing you to add its functions into your smart home framework. You can use your phone or a smart speaker to issue commands to Alexa, allowing it to control the plug and, by extension, whatever’s plugged into it. It’s great for simple devices like lamps, fans, and anything else that would normally begin running as soon as it’s turned on.

As Amazon users in the reviews attest, setting up one of these plugs is very easy, as it’s simple to sync them up to the Alexa app right out of the box. Besides controlling your home with your voice and phone, they’re also useful for remotely disabling devices when you’re out of the house.

Amazon Fire TV Stick HD

Alexa can be used via an Amazon Fire TV, allowing you to not only sync and manage your Amazon Prime Video preferences, but get recommendations from Alexa itself on new shows to watch. If you don’t have a standalone Fire TV, you can add Alexa functionality to any regular TV with an open HDMI port. All it takes is an Amazon Fire TV Stick, the HD version of which only costs $34.99.

While this particular model doesn’t provide quite the same visual fidelity as the 4K Fire Stick models, that’s the only department where you’d be compromising. The HD model has all of the other important features, giving you access to a massive library of streaming apps in a compact, portable package. More importantly, you can access all of Alexa’s functions via the included voice remote. Just press the microphone button on it and you can issue commands and make requests, whether you want to run something on a different device or just want Alexa to recommend you something to watch.

Users agree this particular model makes a great budget replacement for an older Fire Stick. That’s especially true if you’ve got a smaller TV with a lower resolution that wouldn’t be able to effectively use the more expensive models.

Amazon Echo Pop Smart Speaker

Smart speakers are one of the signature devices of the Alexa ecosystem. They’re what allow you to issue commands to Alexa from just about anywhere in your home, even if you don’t have a screen handy. Compared to some other Alexa devices, smart speakers aren’t especially expensive, but there’s certainly nothing wrong with saving some cash wherever you can. To that end, the cheapest Alexa smart speaker you can get is the Amazon Echo Pop, which costs just $39.99.

The Echo Pop is the smallest smart speaker in Amazon’s repertoire, designed to be compact and inconspicuous enough to suit small rooms like bedrooms. While its audio isn’t as powerful as the higher-end Echo Dot speakers, it’s still perfectly good at its primary job: listening for your commands to Alexa. You can have Alexa set alarms and reminders, play music, give you the news, and just about anything else with a quick vocal command, with the small light bar at the top indicating when the device is and isn’t listening.

An Amazon user in the reviews explained that, compared to the Echo Dots, the Echo Pop doesn’t have as much sound projection ability. However, what sound it does have comes through crystal clear, and its small size makes it great for finding a spot on a shelf in an otherwise cramped room.

Amazon Echo Spot Smart Alarm Clock

The regular Alexa smart speakers can set alarms to help wake you up in the morning, but they’re still just speakers, with no display functionalities. If you need your bedside or desktop smart speaker to have an actual clock face you can read, but don’t want to go all the way up to a full smart display yet, there is a middle ground. That middle ground is Amazon’s sole smart alarm clock, the Amazon Echo Spot, which will run you $79.99.

The Echo Spot boasts all of the same features as the Echo Pop and Echo Dot smart speakers, but with a small, yet healthy pinch of smart display functionality mixed in. The customizable clock display can show the current time, of course, but it can also display the current date, the weather, the titles and artists of whatever music is playing, and the names of any other smart devices it’s currently networked with. It’s also handy for helping you to wake up in the morning, as the display can gradually illuminate alongside your programmed alarm.

If you’re in the market for an alarm clock that’s just bright enough to read at night without flash-frying your eyes, plus all of the functions and sound quality of an Echo speaker, the Echo Spot is a sound choice. That’s especially true if you’re not looking for the full smart display experience yet.

Amazon Echo Show 5 Smart Display

Smart displays are Alexa’s most advanced and, naturally, most expensive department. The majority of Amazon Echo Show smart displays will easily exceed $100 at the bare minimum, if not significantly more than that. However, don’t think you’ve been priced out of this particular sector just yet. You’ve still got an attractive option: the Amazon Echo Show 5, which is a comparatively affordable $89.99.

The Echo Show 5 may be the lowest-end model of Echo Show currently available, but it’s no slouch, packing a variety of hidden Alexa features you can utilize. From its 5.5-inch display, you can make video calls, check feeds from connected video doorbells, display weather and news headlines, and even stream music and shows. Naturally, it doubles as a smart speaker in its own right, allowing you to issue commands to Alexa in order to easily facilitate all of those functions. The Echo Show 5 even has its own built-in camera, allowing it to double as a security or pet camera you can connect to from other Alexa-compatible display devices or your smartphone.

The addition of a screen helps make checking information and keeping tabs on your smart home setup easier than relying on sound alone. In the reviews, one user noted enjoying its convenient assistance for everyday tasks like answering questions and setting reminders.

Source

Leopatrizi/Getty Images

Smartphone camera technology has come a long way since the days of blurry pics captured via flip phones. There’s even an argument to be made that, given the strength of most smartphone cameras (which can vary depending on your particular brand of smartphone camera), there’s no need for a separate budget-friendly digital camera any longer. Thus, it may come as a surprise that consumers (and particularly teen and Gen Z tech users) have begun to re-embrace the compact digital cameras that millennials previously used out of necessity. However, upon closer inspection of this trend, it’s clear there are a few valid reasons younger amateur photographers have given digicams another moment to shine.

First, let’s address one of the more obvious factors likely driving the resurgence of compact digital cameras: nostalgia. Just as vinyl is making a comeback at least in part due to a desire to recapture the magic of the past, digicams are becoming a must-have accessory again because they directly remind users of the early 2000s. Some even point out that the look of digicam photos tends to differ from that of most smartphone photos, evoking the not-too-distant past in a way that may simply appeal to those who prefer pics with a slightly retro feel.

Shooting with a digicam may also add a ritual to the experience of taking a photo. Sometimes, an album “feels” more special on vinyl because you didn’t just select it on Spotify. The process of taking photos with a digicam may offer a similar experience.

Taking photos with a compact digital camera keeps you off your phone

Leopatrizi/Getty Images

Guarding against distractions and allowing budding photographers to truly be in the moment is another reason digicams are seeing renewed popularity. When you take out your phone to snap a pic, you’re suddenly tempted to open other apps, check email, post on social media, doom scroll, and so on. That’s not something you need to worry about when you’re taking pictures with a device designed to do just one thing.

Similarly, and perhaps ironically, some of the limitations of compact digital cameras may account for their unique cachet among Gen Z. With a smartphone, you can snap a virtually unlimited number of photos. This flexibility may prevent you from taking photos with real intention. On the other hand, when the number of photos you can take is restricted, you may be more conscious about everything from framing to deciding which moments are worth capturing.

It’s certainly too early to tell whether the return of digicams is a fad or if it represents a long-term shift in how consumers approach photography. That said, while fads tend to be rooted in novelty, the digicam renaissance reflects certain practical advantages these retro cams offer. It’s entirely possible tech companies will take notice by releasing their own improved compact digital cameras that offer the appeal of the old with the capabilities of the new.

Source

The idea of drawing power from huge machines floating high in the sky may at first sound fanciful, but China is taking the technology seriously and is already making some big claims about its potential. These are giant airborne wind turbines capable of reaching stronger and more consistent winds than the more common ground-based turbines that can take a decade to pay off that people are increasingly seeing on land and in coastal waters.

Hardware for China’s Stratospheric Airborne Wind Energy Systems (SAWES) initiative is being developed by Tsinghua University and technology startup SAWES Energy Technology Co., Ltd., both based in Beijing. Touted as a low-impact alternative to conventional wind turbines, engineers unveiled their first design in late 2024. The latest one, the SAWES Type S2000, was announced in early 2026 and is hailed as the first airborne wind power system capable of generating power at the megawatt scale, equal to a million watts of power. SAWES claims the S2000’s hourly output “can fully charge approximately 30 electric vehicles from zero to full.”

Flying wind turbines could be a game-changer, but there are challenges

These tethered aerostats are filled with helium and lift wind turbines as high as 2,000 meters (about 6,500 feet). With the elevated winds stronger and steadier than at ground level, the spinning turbines are able to efficiently generate electricity and send it to a ground station via a cable. The S2000 aerostat is 60 meters (197 feet) long and 40 meters (131 feet) in both height and width, and holds 12 turbines with a power capacity of three megawatts. By comparison, the average U.S. turbine has a capacity for 2.75 megawatts.

The aerostat enjoys a major advantage over ground‑based turbines as it can ignore ground-level height restrictions. It also eliminates the need for land use, utilizes stronger and more reliable winds, and offers a far wider range of deployment locations. China’s huge size also gives it an edge, as it has vast remote regions with few people, making it perfect for tethered aerostats to do their work.

But the technology also comes with challenges. For example, stormy weather can pose a problem, with severe weather potentially forcing the aerostat to land until calmer conditions prevail. Also, the tether can suffer considerable wear and tear, leading to damage that requires repair work, which can disrupt power generation. Consideration also has to be given to low-flying aircraft, with the tethered high‑altitude aerostats potentially creating hazards for helicopters and emergency-response aircraft that operate at similar altitudes.

China’s green-energy push

Sean Gallup/Getty Images

China’s growing interest in harvesting energy from high-altitude winds is part of a broader green-energy push that also includes increasing investments in solar power and electric vehicle production. It’s the world’s dominant battery producer and a global leader in lithium‑ion manufacturing, too, and the government is also pushing renewable hydrogen infrastructure as part of efforts to reduce the nation’s reliance on fossil fuels. If China can scale its flying turbines reliably and affordably, it will gain access to high‑altitude winds that conventional ground‑based turbines are physically unable to tap, turning what is still a niche technology into a new pillar of its expanding green‑energy strategy.

In contrast, the U.S. has so far focused its wind‑energy plans on offshore windfarms as well as those onshore, while airborne systems similar to China’s remain largely in the R&D phase. President Trump is well known for his hostility toward conventional wind power setups, repeatedly criticizing their appearance and impact on the landscape. Such a viewpoint suggests that aerostats, which are quieter and less obtrusive, might face fewer of the same political objections if they find their way into the U.S. energy debate.

Source

Finnbarr Webster/Getty Images

We may receive a commission on purchases made from links.

Warm weather is here, and for many that means doing a bit of spring cleaning. Going through everything and deciding what to keep, what to donate, and what to toss out. If you have grandparents, you might even find yourself up in the attic helping them clean out old boxes that have been collecting dust for decades. And hiding inside those boxes might be a treasure trove of retro gadgets that are making a comeback, but could also be worth a pretty penny because of it. 

From early cellular devices and game consoles, to throwback audio players and wacky cameras, there could be some interesting old tech grandpa still has that’s more valuable than you think. We searched high and low online to find out what vintage tech treasures are worth some serious money. According to sold listings from online auction sites, these old gadgets are the ones you might just want to keep your eyes open for next time you’re helping your grandparents sort through their stuff.

Sony TPS-L2 Walkman

Carl Court/Getty Images

The Sony TPS-L2 Walkman is a fantastic piece of retro tech that was released in 1979, and has received a dose of modern attention thanks to its inclusion in films such as “Guardians of the Galaxy.” It truly changed the face of music, as it was the first commercially available personal stereo cassette player. Units on the secondhand market today can sell for hundreds of dollars, like a Walkman that was listed as broken and best for parts, selling on eBay for $361 in May 2026. 

That’s a pretty large sum of money for something that isn’t working, showing just how popular these devices still are. If you have one in good working condition, be aware that completed sales in 2026 range from $565 to as much as $1,800. And if you find other Walkman models laying around grandpa’s house, chances are they’re worth something too, with vintage units from the 80s and 90s selling for $100 and up, even in non-working condition.

Commodore Amiga 500

Photology1971/Shutterstock

People of a certain age will most likely remember the Commodore 64 computer. It was a staple of the home and classroom in the 1980s before Apple arrived. And while the Commodore 64 can be worth something on the secondhand market in good condition, its the later Commodore Amiga 500 where the real value is. Perhaps not as popular as the Commodore 64 in the United States, the Amiga 500 was a final effort by Commodore to stay relevant in the growing computer market as losses racked up. 

It struck a chord with music producers thanks to an impressive audio processing chip, and some artists still use the machine to this day. Gaming also benefited, with titles such as “Lemmings”, “Dune II: The Building of a Dynasty”, and “Worms” hitting the machine. Complete Commodore Amiga 500s have sold online for $350, with units featuring music sampling software going for more than $600. 

Sony Trinitron television

There was a time where you could walk into a thrift store and find a CRT television selling for a couple of dollars. In 2015, major thrift retailers stopped accepting these types of TVs because the volume was overwhelming. In fact, I snagged a few for free, as my local Goodwill was going to simply toss them. But recently, the demand for CRT televisions has increased as younger generations get into retro video gaming. They are also popular with kids from the 1990s who are now adults with money to spend on rebuilding their collections. 

Good CRT televisions can be worth a pretty penny, but none more so than the Sony PVM line. These televisions sell for hundreds of dollars, with some units of the smaller PVM line selling online for over $1,000. That’s a lot of money for an old TV that might simply be hiding away in a garage. My parents owned a massively heavy 36″ Sony Trinitron that’s now the centerpiece of my own game room. These models can sell online for over $150, making saving it from the scrapheap one of the best investments I made as a teen. 

Nokia 9110i Communicator

Photology1971/Shutterstock

Nokia is still making smartphones in 2026, even though some are cheap Android phones you should steer clear of. But older devices like the Nokia 9110i Communicator can be worth some serious money. A Nokia Communicator, from 1996, sold online for nearly $500 in February 2026. Others have sold for upwards of $300 in untested condition, and even upgraded models from the era have retained impressive value. This cellphone line from Nokia was popular with the business crowd of the day, as the face flipped open to expose a full keyboard and screen. 

The Communicator series came with a lot of tech for the time, including an MMC card slot and a web browser. But the main thing that made these retro Nokia gadgets unique was the GEOS operating system that ran as a layer on top of Embedded DOS-ROM. This meant the phone could run MS-DOS applications, and was one of the reasons it became sought after in the business world as it helped blur the line between a cellphone, PDA, and laptop.

Polaroid 600 Tasmanian Devil Instant Camera

Not every retro gadget that grandpa still has remains valuable today. Sure, old film cameras are popular again, but a vintage Polaroid 600 camera can be found online for less than $100 in 2026. But if you have a specific model of the camera, you might be able to translate that into a bit more money. Like the Polaroid 600 Tasmanian Devil edition that has traded hands for several hundreds of dollars. Released in 1999 and shaped like the head of the Tasmanian Devil, this retro camera is sure to draw attention. 

Polaroid even sold matching film that featured a Looney Tunes branded frame. Boxed versions of the camera have sold on eBay for as much as $350 in 2026, no doubt driven by its popularity among instant camera and Looney Tunes collectors. Seeing someone whip out the head of the Tasmanian Devil, only for it to open its mouth and take a Polaroid picture would surely be entertaining, and goes to show that modern technology feels like it’s lost a step in terms of simple fun features.

Methodology

Steveallenphoto/Getty Images

When researching retro gadgets that could be valuable today, we looked to what has been selling recently on the secondhand market. This included eBay and other online shopping platforms such as OfferUp, Facebook Marketplace, and Mercari. We avoided general speculation on pricing and overvaluation by collectors, relying solely on the final sale value of retro gadgets sold on these sites within the last year.

Source

Stas Malyarevsky/Shutterstock

Since IBM launched the ThinkPad in 1992, the iconic laptop has carried a unique identity with it in the form of a small red “button” located between the G, H, and B keys on the keyboard. But this isn’t a button in the traditional sense — it’s a tiny joystick officially known as the TrackPoint. Even under the Lenovo umbrella (IBM’s personal computer division was acquired by Lenovo in 2005), the TrackPoint has remained as a way to give users a more precise and easily accessible method for moving their mouse cursor around.

According to a comment made by former Lenovo chief design officer, David Hill, the TrackPoint was intended to make it possible to type and move your cursor without needing to reset your typing position. And over the years it has persisted, despite the evolution of the laptop industry. It utilizes several pressure-related resistors which are built directly into the body of the laptop’s keyboard. Whenever pressure is applied to the TrackPoint, the resistors detect the pressure and then translate it into mouse cursor movement on your screen.

With tech and gadget prices expected to increase in 2026, having a way to make a product stand out could be key to keeping consumers invested in a company’s ecosystem. The TrackPoint’s multi-decade legacy and overall usefulness remains a reason for consumers to choose a ThinkPad over some of the best laptops out there.

Should you use the TrackPoint over a standard trackpad?

Hnjosh/Shutterstock

Opinions on whether you should use the TrackPoint or your laptop’s trackpad vary from person to person. Some fans say it is better than a standard trackpad, claiming it offers more movement without as much effort thanks to its sensitivity. Others argue that the sensitivity is one of the TrackPoint’s biggest weaknesses, while some claim that those complaining about it are using it incorrectly.

The TrackPoint centers around a typing style known as touch typing, a popular way to type using all ten of your fingers without having to look at the keyboard. Touch typing relies on a set of “home keys” which are located right around where the TrackPoint rests. The position of the little red nub was chosen specifically to make it easy to interact with the cursor using one of the fingers positioned closely to it, so that you could adjust your cursor without having to pull your hand away completely. If you use touch typing positioning, then it absolutely could be worth experimenting with the TrackPoint if you already have a ThinkPad.

If you want to try the TrackPoint yourself, then you may want to pick up a ThinkPad with it soon. Despite the red joystick’s iconic history, Lenovo did debut the ThinkPad X9 in 2025, marking the first time the reliable laptop brand’s clamshell line of ThinkPads did not include the TrackPoint. This has left many to wonder if the little red button will live on or if it might be retired going forward.

Source

Raul_mellado/Getty Images

The last time I upgraded my smartphone, “The Batman” was in theaters, “Severance” was the hot new show, and everyone was playing the recently released “Elden Ring.” I didn’t buy my iPhone 13 thinking I’d still be holding onto it in 2026, but over four years later, I have no intentions of replacing it any time soon. I’m not alone in this, either. According to a Reviews.org survey, the average American keeps their smartphone for around 29 months, up from 22 months in 2016. An Allstate survey found that just under half keep their phone for over three years — a far cry from the annual updates that were once so closely associated with these devices.

I was never one of those people who got a new phone every year, but I used to upgrade more often. After about two years, the combination of frustration with my current iPhone and interest in the latest features would convince me to get the latest model. When it comes to my current phone, though, that urge to upgrade has yet to manifest.

If it ain’t broke

The primary reason I’ve kept my iPhone 13 for so long is simple: It’s still working. In the past, my phone would essentially tell me it was time to get a new one when it started to crash frequently or refuse to hold a charge for long. I got my current phone after my last one (then around two years old) shut itself off and wouldn’t turn on for over an hour while I was away from home, a stressful experience I had no interest in repeating.

Four years on, though, nothing of the sort has happened with my iPhone 13. Its maximum battery capacity is 80% and, while it doesn’t always run smoothly, I can’t recall ever having to force restart it. With smartphones getting more and more expensive — the iPhone 17 and Google Pixel 10 start at $799 and the Samsung Galaxy S26 is $899.99 and up — holding onto my current, functional phone for as long as possible feels like a no-brainer.

Apple also hasn’t given me much of a reason to upgrade, nor has Samsung or Google convinced me to switch. While the latest smartphone models offer greater power and new features, the differences between this year’s phone and last haven’t been particularly dramatic in some time. The iPhone 17 may have a better chip and higher-quality camera, but that’s not nearly as eye-catching as the iPhone 4’s front-facing camera, the iPhone 4S’ Siri, or the iPhone X’s design overhaul.

Smartphones are getting less exciting and more expensive

Enkhtulga Khandsuren/Shutterstock

Smartphone makers are touting AI features lately, but my complete disinterest in having things like image generation and writing tools in the palm of my hand isn’t unique. A 2025 CNET survey found that only 11% of smartphone owners in the U.S. upgraded for AI features, down from 18% in the previous year. The same survey found around 29% don’t find mobile AI useful or want additional AI features, an increase from 25% in 2024.

AI has become inescapable, but I’m sure I’m not the only one who sees these features as detractions rather than encouragement to upgrade. I find the environmental, security, and overall societal concerns about the technology more compelling than custom emojis or smarter Siri. There’s a part of me that wants to wait in hopes that the early hype dies down and smartphone makers start noticing that the majority of users don’t care and aren’t willing to pay for AI features.

My feelings aside, hype itself is no longer enough to sell a new phone. AI and folding smartphones (the other big buzzword in recent years) aren’t exciting to the majority of consumers, and increasing prices makes upgrading less feasible, especially in this economy.

For me, though, keeping the iPhone 13 I bought back in 2022 has gone from a subconscious choice to a conscious one. My phone has yet to signal to me that its time is running short, and since Apple supports iPhone models for around seven years, I have plenty of time until planned obsolescence makes a new phone a necessity. That doesn’t mean I’m planning to keep this phone until the bitter end, but for the time being, I see no reason to shell out hundreds of dollars for a new one.

Source

Miloscirkovic/Getty Images

Smart TVs are now the standard purchase for many users who want a new device for the home, but you need to know their disadvantages. With access to several streaming services, apps, and even integration with other devices in your home, they offer excellent convenience for many people. However, even with all these benefits, some limitations can change your experience with them.

Privacy, security, and even hidden costs can affect your use. Unlike conventional models, Smart TVs work through the internet and always collect your usage data to understand how you access content. In addition, a Smart TV without internet access simply cannot deliver most of the features it offers.

These problems do not make Smart TVs a bad purchase. They remain excellent products for most users, but knowing their limitations makes a real difference when you buy one. So, here are some disadvantages of these gadgets to consider before bringing them into your home.

Smart TVs lose most features without internet access

Gorodenkoff/Getty Images

To use most Smart TV functions, you need to stay connected to the internet. When you lose your connection, streaming services, smart home integrations, and all other network-dependent services will also go down. If your cable channels also use a provider that relies on the internet instead of a satellite receiver, you also lose access to them during that time.

Although this does not create a problem for people who live in places where the connection stays stable most of the time, some people face these outages regularly. Unstable internet speeds can also reduce streaming service quality, meaning you may have to deal with buffering or lower-resolution video during one of the best parts of the movie you are watching.

If you have a limited Internet package that caps how much data you can use each month, you also need to be careful not to use it all just by watching content. In the end, a Smart TV will only work as well as the quality of the internet you have in your home.

Lack of privacy controls allows constant data monitoring

Yuganov Konstantin/Shutterstock

One of the biggest concerns with owning a Smart TV is how it collects and uses your personal data. These devices constantly monitor your usage habits, such as your favorite apps, how long you use them, and what type of content you consume. This almost always happens in the background, and it often helps create personalized recommendations for you.

But the TV does not use this data only to learn what you like in practice and make suggestions based on that. Usually, they also share it with other advertisers and partners. As a result, you cannot know which information they collect, much less how those companies use it later.

In addition, unlike smartphones or computers, where privacy settings usually feel more accessible, Smart TVs offer much more limited control over this tracking. Some even offer a few ways to prevent your TV from spying, but this varies by manufacturer and the models available online.

The end of software updates shortens a Smart TV’s lifespan

Zuyeu Uladzimir/Shutterstock

When you buy a TV, you expect these devices to last for a long time. After all, they represent a major investment, and although this holds true for dumb models, it may not apply to some Smart TVs. That happens because you need to keep your software up to date to maintain most features and security, which usually makes its life cycle much shorter.

Whether due to hardware compatibility or similar reasons, many manufacturers tend to end support for updates for some older models much sooner. This creates a chance, depending on your Smart TV model, that it will stop receiving the latest software over time. That can change your experience with it completely from one day to the next.

For example, some streaming apps may stop working as expected if they no longer receive updates, as compatibility issues begin to surface. In addition, even when an app opens, it can still lose important features or even crash while you use it. Over time, you may have to use external devices, such as streaming boxes, to use them properly.

Subscriptions and soundbars add up quickly

Blossom Stock Studio/Shutterstock

Although a Smart TV already comes with several built-in features, you still need to spend extra money to enhance your experience further. For example, when you want better audio throughout the room where it sits, you need to invest in a good soundbar. Depending on how much you value that quality, the extra investment can be substantial, especially given what you already paid for the TV.

In addition, a Smart TV only opens the door to streaming services. Some companies add free channels that you can access at no cost, such as Samsung TV, but the best streaming services always require a separate payment. So, when you want to watch a movie on Netflix or HBO Max, you need a specific subscription. Given the wide variety of streaming platforms available today, subscribing to all of them can be costly.

That is why the investment you make in a Smart TV covers only part of the cost of maintaining it. Many of the features that make these models so interesting might be locked behind subscription services you need to pay for every month.

Outdated hardware slows down menu performance and apps

Tero Vesalainen/Shutterstock

Another disadvantage of buying a Smart TV involves the loss of performance these products face over time. You can make a major investment to get one of these devices today, but they still depend on a processor, memory, and even storage to work correctly. So, menus that once worked normally can become slower, and even small delays can appear when you press a command on the remote.

This happens because apps keep receiving updates, and even when they seem simple, these new features can make them heavier. At the same time, the hardware stays the same. Although this does not affect flagship Smart TV models as much, entry-level models usually show these limitations sooner, since many use simpler hardware to reduce the final price.

As a result, this slowdown can make simple tasks like searching for a movie in the Netflix catalog frustrating. Switching from one tab to another or leaving one app for another can cause lag and require more patience from you. The solution usually involves using external streaming devices to keep things smooth over time without buying a new TV.

Source

Yuliia24/Shutterstock

Even as electric vehicles battle for a footing in the mainstream automotive market today, you might be surprised to learn that this struggle actually dates back nearly 200 years. That’s right — battery-powered propulsion dates back to the early days of the horseless carriage. While steam and internal combustion were first vying to replace the horse, early inventors were already making the case for the electric motor.

The first electric vehicle to be developed was created by Robert Anderson, and while it was more or less a prototype and considered crude at the time, it is the genesis of today’s electric vehicles. In the late 1800s, electric cars became more standard as car manufacturers began to understand how to design, build, and sell them to the public. In the early 1890s, William Morrison crafted the first electric car in the United States. Inspired by the horse-drawn carriages that came before it, the vehicle was more or less an electric wagon. Unlike typical cars, there was no nose at the front because there was no engine. The driver sat where a buggy driver or chauffeur would and steered the electric car from there. It was able to hold six passengers and had a top speed of 14 miles per hour. Compare that to the high-powered EVs of day that can power your home in an emergency.

The benefits and drawbacks of early electric cars

HelgaQ/Shutterstock

Moving into the 1900s, the electric car was growing in popularity, but, much like today, there was a price premium for electric compared to cars with an internal combustion engine. In fact, the typical cost of an electric car was around $2,000, which is close to $60,000 in today’s money and more than the cheapest EVs you can buy new right now. That being said, electric cars were much quieter than the horse and carriage, steam-powered, and gas-powered cars of the time period, and they didn’t emit smelly exhaust. Studebaker advertised its “noiseless, easy running” electric cars in local papers and print media.

Studebaker began making electric vehicles in 1902 and even Thomas Edison made an electric car in 1889. These electric automobiles came with a battery that needed to be charged before journeys. Early EVs had lead-acid batteries that were rechargeable, but there wasn’t much infrastructure for charging in much of America. Batteries had to be maintained which could be done by the owner, the manufacturer, home charging stations, or garages.

How far could an early electric car travel?

Stock Montage/Getty Images

Electric vehicles were a feat of engineering in their day. They replaced traditional means of transportation like the buggy and even walking. People were able to use them to get around more quickly and efficiently. They may not have been fast or able to travel long distances before being charged again, unlike the longest-range electric vehicle you can buy today, but they did provide easier transportation for owners.

Electric cars were capable of driving between 30 to 40 miles in the earliest days. That’s enough range to visit the local market and get back home before running out of juice. Compared to their steam-powered rivals at the time, owning one of those may require owners to sit outside for up to 45 minutes to start the vehicle. As time went on, EVs became even more efficient and by the mid to late 1900s, cars could travel much farther on a charge with some even setting records of 150 miles in on go. The early electric cars were made by a handful of auto manufacturers throughout the world, and at the start of the 20th century, more than one third of vehicles on the road were said to be electric.

Source

Kjekol/Getty Images

We may receive a commission on purchases made from links.

Game controllers have come a long way since the days of two buttons and a D-pad on the Nintendo Entertainment System, but gamers never stop pushing the envelope — whether that’s more buttons, customization options, flashy RGB lighting, or a tiny little LED screen (for reasons). Even Sony themselves have come up with some really weird PlayStation controller concepts over the years. Partly that’s because the humble controller now has to do more than ever, expected to handle everything from fiercely competitive shooters to accessibility needs and gyroscopic aiming. 

Today, we’re skipping the budget end entirely and heading straight to the premium. We’ve picked out some of the most expensive controllers that are available to buy now, that work with one or more of PC or current generation consoles. While these controllers are expensive, they’re also good. We’re also steering clear of more specialist equipment like racing wheels, flight sticks (just one gaming gadget that used to be essential), and arcade fight pads — the budgets on those would dwarf everything else on this list.   

1. Steam Controller

The new Steam Controller is essentially the Steam Deck without the Deck bit — a gaming controller built from the ground up with PC gaming in mind, rather than force-fitting a console controller. Built with function over form in mind, PC gamers won’t be stuck when a Windows game throws up a random dialog box or when a mouse cursor just makes more sense.

The two haptic trackpads are the real highlight here, along with gyroscopic sensors which can assist with getting that mouse-like precision for aiming. It’s not the first time we’ve seen gyroscopic aiming in a controller, but uniquely the Steam Controller introduces Grip Sense to activate it, with haptic feedback to indicate when it’s active. 

The Steam Controller of 2026 (not be confused with the Steam Controller of 2015), was released barely a week ago at the time of writing for $99 direct from Steam, but good luck trying to get your hands on it. Expect supplies to be short and scalpers to do their thing for a while. But if you can be patient, this is a brilliant choice for PC gamers (and also compatible with Android, iOS, Mac, and of course, SteamOS).

2. ByoWave Proteus

Ever wanted to just rearrange your Xbox controller to put the trigger under your thumb and joystick by your pinky — or remove the joystick entirely? Perhaps you’re tired of pesky ergonomic grips, and want to go old-school cool? We don’t either, but with the ByoWave Proteus modular controller, you absolutely could, because this is about as reconfigurable as controllers come — including full software remap for everything. ByoWave even offers some free 3D models to help with turning your Proteus into, for instance, a flight stick.  

The ByoWave Proteus has a great reason to exist though: for gamers with a disability, it’s a godsend, allowing them to reconfigure the control scheme in a way that works for them. It’s a neat concept that we applaud, but for everyone else, it’s a fun novelty. 

Making games accessible doesn’t come cheap though, with a full kit starting at $276.50 on Amazon, though you’ll find some bargains on eBay if you hunt around. 

3. Turtle Beach Victrix Pro BFG

Using software to remap button controls is all very well, but what about physically pulling the buttons out and moving them somewhere else? The Victrix Pro from Turtle Beach is a highly modular, pro-level controller. 

You can rotate either the left or right segments to swap positions, or swap out the entire right joystick for a larger six button selection for fighting games, for instance. There’s a limited number of configurations, but if you want one good controller that can be used for multiple control styles, it’s a good option. For the pros, there are four back buttons, swappable sticks, and lockable triggers — but annoyingly, Hall Effect sticks and triggers are a separate $39.99 upgrade. 

Available in Xbox and PS5 versions (both are compatible with PC), the Victrix Pro BFG normally retails at $199.99, but can currently be found on Amazon for as low as $127.03. 

4. Thrustmaster ESwap X Pro

Similar to the Victrix Pro, the Thrustmaster ESwap X Pro ($159.99 on Amazon, suitable for Xbox and PC) allows some degree of physical reconfiguration — though only the joystick and d-pad modules are swappable, and not the buttons. Uniquely, Thrustmaster sells additional “NXG T-Mod” module packs too, allows users to customize the grip plates, joystick, and triggers for to their preference without tools. This can be either to swap the hardware functionality, customize the looks, or just for ease of repairability without having to replace the entire controller. Third party modules are also available. Four configurable rear buttons, on device profile swaps, and locking triggers round out the pro-level offering. 

While experts praise the build quality, crucially, the ESwap Pro X isn’t wireless, and at an additional $49.99 for module packs or $19.99 for individual parts, you’d have to be unusually excited by the idea of a glowing LED joystick.

5. Xbox Elite Series 2

Capix Denan/Shutterstock

Retailing at $149.99, the Xbox Elite Series 2 is the official pro-level Xbox controller from Microsoft, featuring adjustable tension thumbsticks and a range of interchangeable parts, as well as four rear paddles, trigger locks, and custom profiles. Battery life is also superb at a stated 40 hours of wireless use, but it lacks Hall effect or magnetic sticks. 

There’s little else to make the Elite Series 2 stand out and it’s not the most exciting of controllers in 2026; it has no extra screens, trackpads for mouse emulation, weird ergonomics, or modular buttons. It’s a bit boring and starting to show its age, if we’re honest, but it’s the premium option if you want to stick with something first-party, and a safe upgrade on the basic Xbox controller. The Elite Series 2  works with all the One series Xboxes as well as the X and S, plus PC. 

6. Nacon Revolution X

As well as keyboard mapping, gyroscopic controls, and Hall effect joysticks, the Nacon Revolution X ($199.99, Amazon) hides one unique superpower: It has a small touchscreen on the controller itself for swapping profiles and configuring button behaviour on-device, rather than requiring PC software.

Reviews also praise the powerful rumble motors for haptic immersion; it’s especially suited to racing games (if you insist on playing racing games without a wheel, I suppose). The Hall effect joysticks and triggers are a step up on the Xbox Elite Series 2, providing longer-term reliability that shouldn’t be subject to drift. Although already wider and heftier than the Xbox Elite Series 2, the Revolution Revolution X package includes a set of weights that you can insert into the grips. It’s more expensive than Microsoft’s offering, too, but the sheer level of software and hardware customization should justify the bump for those who appreciate getting everything dialled in just so.  

7. Azeron Cyborg 2

James / BGR

It’s a debate as old as time. Which is better — keyboard and mouse, or handheld controller? Controllers were designed for gaming and convenience when sat at the sofa; but it’s true that nothing beats the precision aiming of a mouse. The keyboard part though? That’s the weakest link. But why choose at all when you can just take the best bits of both? 

The Azeron Cyborg (from $230) is a hybrid peripheral for PC gaming that combines the convenience of a joystick for movement with all the buttons you could possibly need literally in reach of your fingertips. And they’re not clunky key caps either; they’re ergonomic microswitch pads that need only the smallest amount of finger travel to activate when speed is of the essence. Your other hand is kept free for that sweet precision mouse aiming.

The Azeron Cyborg might not let you rearrange buttons — instead opting to just put lots of buttons everywhere — but it is easily customized to your hand shape and size with adjustable lengths and angles where needed. You can even have your gamertag emblazoned on the side. 

8. SCUF Envision Pro v2

If there’s one thing we’ve always thought was lacking in controllers, it’s got to be more flashy LED lights. Who wants to stare at a big screen when you’ve got a disco in your lap? The LED bar on the underside of the SCUF Envision Pro can sync up to your gaming rig (or you can ignore them entirely), but is otherwise a very capable controller with all the usual features: remappable keys, back paddles, and trigger locks — with the v2 edition finally adding Hall effect sticks. Designed for PC gaming only, the highlight here are five configurable “G-key” macro buttons underneath the sticks.

Sadly, the iCUE software lets it down and is required for initial setup. The depth of macro programming is impressive however, with profiles stored on device once configured. At $179.99, the SCUF Envision Pro v2 is an excellent choice for PC first gamers, with an extensive set of customization options when bought direct at Scuf Gaming. Be wary if shopping around though: the original 2023 model without Hall effect sticks is still widely available at the same price. 

9. PlayStation DualSense Edge

Wongsakorn 2468/Shutterstock

The DualSense Edge is Sony’s official pro-grade controller option, and the biggest advantage is not the new features it brings to the table, but the solid base it starts from — with all the features that make the standard DualSense the best gaming controller yet (and Sony has a record of making impactful controllers throughout the PlayStation’s history). That includes the adaptive triggers, excellent haptic feedback, touchpad, gyroscope, and comfortable ergonomic design. On top of that, it adds the pro features you’d expect, in the form of rear paddles, remappable controls, custom profiles, and adjustable trigger lengths.

The Sony DualSense Edge, at $199 on Amazon, is one of the pricier options — and you’re limited to just two back buttons. There are no Hall effect sticks either, but the entire stick modules can be replaced if you ever start to experience drift. But if you want a premium PlayStation option, this should really be your first choice. 

10. Razer Raiju v3 Pro

Designed exclusively to cater for the serious eSports crowd on PS5 (though also compatible with PC), the Razer Raiju ($225, Amazon) actually strips out some popular DualSense features like haptics and adaptive triggers to focus on responsiveness and lag-free gaming, along with a host of remappable rear paddles and claw-grip bumpers. And, Razer is one of the top gaming controller brands as ranked by users. 

The Raiju is the PlayStation version of the popular Xbox Wolverine model, though some note it’s a slight downgrade in build quality compared to the Wolverine, and despite the familiar design, a fair bit larger than standard DualSense controllers. The Raiju features next-generation TMR (Tunnel magnetoresistance) sticks — an evolutionary step up on Hall effect — which reduces drift and power consumption which increasing the sampling resolution. While it has official PlayStation accreditation, you’ll still need a special wireless dongle to use the Raiju. Unless you’re regularly competing in tournaments, this probably isn’t the controller for you. 

Methodology

Chong Kee Siong/Getty Images

We selected controllers that specifically cost more than the included default options, but also offer additional, unique features. We haven’t included any controllers that are just more expensive because they’re gold-plated or otherwise modded versions of other controllers already on the list. We also limited our selection to a single controller from each manufacturer, and from reputable manufacturers that have solid expert reviews. The controllers should be functional on one or more current generation consoles or PC, and not just expensive by dint of being rare (we’re looking at you, Orange edition GameCube controller). We’ve excluded specialist equipment like racing wheels, flight sticks, and fighting pads, whilst including a few options that go beyond the basic controller. 

Source

Euan Cherry/Shutterstock

Throughout the 2010s, Warner Bros. Pictures and DC Entertainment were going hard on the release of the new DC Extended Universe, or DCEU, a modern collection of films, television, and other assorted media starring the many heroes and villains popularized in DC comics. In particular, these films from the so-called Snyderverse included the final appearances of Henry Cavill as Superman, with “Man of Steel” and “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.” The movies did well financially, grossing some $1.5 billion collectively, but Cavill has said in retrospect that they weren’t exactly perfect.

It’s no secret that the release of the DCEU films were meant to both capitalize on and compete with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which was in its second phase at the time with films like “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” and “Guardians of the Galaxy.” In a 2017 interview with entertainment magazine The Rake, Cavill explained that while his Superman films made plenty of money at the box office, in an effort to differentiate from the MCU, they were missing a certain something that makes superhero films really resonate with audiences.

Cavill said the films made the right mistakes

Dave J Hogan/Getty Images

As Cavill explained in his interview with The Rake, the production of the DCEU films, and especially his roles as Superman, were made with the express purpose of delivering something unique and distinct from what audiences were expecting of superhero films at the time. However, he lamented that the films didn’t quite hit the same way as other superhero pictures, noting they didn’t give viewers “that sensation which superheroes should give the viewer.”

There is some truth to this; Rotten Tomatoes reviews of “Man of Steel,” for example, were rather middling from both critics and filmgoers, who appreciated the film’s action set pieces, but found the slower moments boring and inauthentic. Of course, there isn’t a single right way to make a superhero film, which is why some superhero films that should’ve been hits end up bombing.

That said, Cavill stated his belief that the “right mistakes” had been made in these films. They provided a vital test case of what worked and what didn’t in a DC superhero flick, ensuring that subsequent movies would hit a better balance between action and drama thanks to learnings from previous shortcomings. He added that the 2017 “Wonder Woman” film was an important step in the right direction, and considering how well it performed financially and critically, he may have been right. Though, considering the less-than-stellar reception of “Justice League”, the lowest-grossing movie in the DCEU at the time, maybe not.

Source